I'm a big fan of the Raider (dissie) with 10 kabs (DL) inside. For 200 points, you got some nasty first turn shooting power.

Are you still using your 'pirate' method? Opening up with long-range fire for the first couple of turns and only then moving in close?

MppqlmdIncubi

Posts : 1844Join date : 2017-07-05

Subject: Re: raider vs venom Thu Aug 17 2017, 14:42

Yep. I've changed it a bit recently : i started taking quite a lot of Mandrakes, and DSed them turn 3 (or turn 4 on 1 game), when i got rid of priority targets with long ranged guns, and started closing in. This creates a huge threat buff that can easily panic an opponent that has already lost his big toys to Darklight.

Yep. I've changed it a bit recently : i started taking quite a lot of Mandrakes, and DSed them turn 3 (or turn 4 on 1 game), when i got rid of priority targets with long ranged guns, and started closing in. This creates a huge threat buff that can easily panic an opponent that has already lost his big toys to Darklight.

If you don't mind, I've got a few more questions:

- Do you tend to move your Raiders in the first couple of turns, or do you stay still to fire the Warriors' Dark Lances at BS3+?

- Where do you put your characters (I ask because the list you showed me previously didn't seem to have any unused transport capacity in any of its vehicles)?

- In turns 3 onwards (or whenever you close in), do you make any effort to get your Warriors into melee, or do you have them shoot from their transports for as long as possible?

- You mentioned before that you used Dark Lance Scourges. Do you start them on the board or do you have them deep strike into play?

MppqlmdIncubi

Posts : 1844Join date : 2017-07-05

Subject: Re: raider vs venom Thu Aug 17 2017, 16:24

I don't mind - This is of course a matter of target access. I don't mind having -1 if it grants me the option to shoot at a key target, and if some unit is dangerously close i'll probably move away. So i often shoot at 4+, but not necessarly. - My character (no plural needed ^^) is currently walking, and furiously writing to his private garage about how much he need his moto-jet/skyboard back. The time he spends running keeps him very fit, though. - If i think the enemy infantry is inferior in cc (Tau/Geq/cultists, or even some gaunts), i'll rush into cc after a good round of rapidfire. I'm also using the fact (that i read on this forum) that a consolidate move can be used to reembark on a transport. - The only scenario where i start my Scourges on the board is if there is absolutly no chance of them being hit if i don't get first turn. That, and if they can be deployed in such a way that they can shoot at a good target without moving (because if you move them, you could have DS'ed for the same price). So they usually come from reserve.

I don't mind - This is of course a matter of target access. I don't mind having -1 if it grants me the option to shoot at a key target, and if some unit is dangerously close i'll probably move away. So i often shoot at 4+, but not necessarly.

- My character (no plural needed ^^) is currently walking, and furiously writing to his private garage about how much he need his moto-jet/skyboard back. The time he spends running keeps him very fit, though.

- If i think the enemy infantry is inferior in cc (Tau/Geq/cultists, or even some gaunts), i'll rush into cc after a good round of rapidfire. I'm also using the fact (that i read on this forum) that a consolidate move can be used to reembark on a transport.

- The only scenario where i start my Scourges on the board is if there is absolutly no chance of them being hit if i don't get first turn. That, and if they can be deployed in such a way that they can shoot at a good target without moving (because if you move them, you could have DS'ed for the same price). So they usually come from reserve.

One last question - it seems like you're relatively light on anti-tank weapons (just 7 Dark Lances, many of which will probably be hitting on 4s), do you not have issues taking out vehicles with your initial volleys?

Thanks, Mppqlmd. Your playstyle is very different to mine but it's one I'm eager to try (especially given the nautical inspiration for it), and I want to try and recreate it as faithfully as possible.

It's a pleasure, and an honor !

Quote :

One last question - it seems like you're relatively light on anti-tank weapons (just 7 Dark Lances, many of which will probably be hitting on 4s), do you not have issues taking out vehicles with your initial volleys?

The problem with that list is finding the perfect balance between Dark Lances and Dissies numbers.In general, i think it's safer to have too many dissies than too many DL, because dissies are a great tool to finish vehicles with 2 or 4 wounds left (firing a DL for 2 HP is not great, and against 4 wounds you could not roll high enough). The general protocole is to fire the Dark Lances first, and fire them against the big game, while they still have a lot of wounds. When they get low, the protocole changes : if they have even (2N) remaining Wounds, start firing Dissies at them, to get most value of that D2 stat. If they have an odd (2N+1) Wounds, you either continue with DLs, or try to finish them (or make them even) with the RWJF missiles.

That way, you'll be sure to use your DL to start the targets, and dissies/missiles to finish them.

Thanks, Mppqlmd. Your playstyle is very different to mine but it's one I'm eager to try (especially given the nautical inspiration for it), and I want to try and recreate it as faithfully as possible.

It's a pleasure, and an honor !

Quote :

One last question - it seems like you're relatively light on anti-tank weapons (just 7 Dark Lances, many of which will probably be hitting on 4s), do you not have issues taking out vehicles with your initial volleys?

The problem with that list is finding the perfect balance between Dark Lances and Dissies numbers.In general, i think it's safer to have too many dissies than too many DL, because dissies are a great tool to finish vehicles with 2 or 4 wounds left (firing a DL for 2 HP is not great, and against 4 wounds you could not roll high enough). The general protocole is to fire the Dark Lances first, and fire them against the big game, while they still have a lot of wounds. When they get low, the protocole changes : if they have even (2N) remaining Wounds, start firing Dissies at them, to get most value of that D2 stat. If they have an odd (2N+1) Wounds, you either continue with DLs, or try to finish them (or make them even) with the RWJF missiles.

That way, you'll be sure to use your DL to start the targets, and dissies/missiles to finish them.

- If i think the enemy infantry is inferior in cc (Tau/Geq/cultists, or even some gaunts), i'll rush into cc after a good round of rapidfire. I'm also using the fact (that i read on this forum) that a consolidate move can be used to reembark on a transport.

Wow, in the rules it really says "If all models in a unit end their move within 3" of a friendly transport, they can embark within it.", but does this really mean I can charge, but still be in 3" of the raider, consolidate and embark them on the raider? Of course they can not disembark and embark in the same turn because this is stated in paragraph one of the transport rules, but this still is something to remember. I could not find the thread where this was discussed, do you remember it?

EDIT: Looks like there is something in the FAQ which has clarified this. Embarking and Disembarking is only possible in the movement phase if not stated differently by some special rule.

CerveWych

Posts : 849Join date : 2014-10-05Location : Ferrara - Emiglia Romagna

Subject: Re: raider vs venom Wed Feb 28 2018, 17:35

Venom. -1 to hit is too good in my opinion, and I don't feel the need about that single lance or disintegrator. Nor the higher capacity (I can play 2 Venom for that).

-1 to hit is too good against plasma gun and any reroll to hit ability. Is smaller, more maneuvrable. And I like his poison saruration.Plus, I don't like to put too many eggs into a Raider

- If i think the enemy infantry is inferior in cc (Tau/Geq/cultists, or even some gaunts), i'll rush into cc after a good round of rapidfire. I'm also using the fact (that i read on this forum) that a consolidate move can be used to reembark on a transport.

Wow, in the rules it really says "If all models in a unit end their move within 3" of a friendly transport, they can embark within it.", but does this really mean I can charge, but still be in 3" of the raider, consolidate and embark them on the raider? Of course they can not disembark and embark in the same turn because this is stated in paragraph one of the transport rules, but this still is something to remember. I could not find the thread where this was discussed, do you remember it?

EDIT: Looks like there is something in the FAQ which has clarified this. Embarking and Disembarking is only possible in the movement phase if not stated differently by some special rule.

Yeah, we've discussed this and I remember the same conclusion : this has been FAQ'ed and is no longer possible. Without the FAQ it was a VERY nice trick to keep in your sleeve.

Just something I've been thinking about recently, since this thread has been revived, Using Venoms and Kabalite Warriors, we can actually out shoot basic marines. Just gotta jot some stuff down:

Lets say we have 10 Marines, or 130 pts. No upgrades.

Compared to a Venom and 5 man Kab squad, 115 pts, no upgrades.

Even if we give them the first turn, and in rapid fire range, they would be (statistically) putting 1.66 wounds onto the venom. Our return fire in Rapid Fire range, would be 2.22 wounds. Next turns: (1.33, 2.22). (1, 2.22.) (0.66, 2.22), etc etc.

outside of rapid fire range, aka 24" for both groups this is reduced to 0.899 wounds for them, and 1.11 wounds for us.

Subsequent turns would just get better and better for us, up until the Venom dies. In rapid fire range with the our barebones squads, we're looking at roughly 50 pts per wound, while a raider equivalent would be 59 pts per wound. Factoring in Dissies, Blaster and Splinter Cannon, it's down to ~58 pts per wound. That being said, you get double the mileage against multiwound models like Primaris. Also, the raider degrades, which sucks.

It takes something like 72 bolter shots to kill a venom, in comparison, a raider is 90. I think for it's cheap price, I'd rather have 2 venoms and 2 squads of kabs rather than 1 boat with 10 kabs armed to the teeth.

So to piece together everything I just said, Venoms are more efficient, better board presence, better for objectives, better movement, doesn't degrade, I personally think that having 2 venoms and 4 squads of 5 kabalites should be the basis of just about any army. That's just 300 points but works wonders for any objective based game. At 2k points, I'd suggest doubling it, using the 5 man squads without transports to act as Zone deniers for any enemy that wants to deepstrike.

Raider is 115Venom is 80You can have the barebones 2*5 kabs in a raider for 185, which means another squad on foot compared to the venom.

So 15 kabalites and 1 raider or 10 kabalites and 2 venoms

I think the prices right now are quite ok when compared to each other, mainly the question do you want multiple drops and more splinter or do you want more darklight.

This is also the feeling I got during my last fights. I mostly play against nids and guard. Against guard with their tanks, I'm always short on darklight. Sadly I don't have ravagers yet, so I just use raiders with 10xwarriors DL and blasters. All DL and blasters go to vehicles while the splinter stuff goes against infantry. But I always use a venom to get my archons to the front.

ZeusiusHellion

Posts : 26Join date : 2014-01-11Location : Colorado/Illinois

Subject: Re: raider vs venom Fri Mar 02 2018, 14:34

Personally I prefer the mobility and flexibility the two venoms provide but I don't think venom spam is the way to go rn. I feel like I don't have board presence. Throw a boat or two in there let the kids play.

It's amazing how much opinions and thoughts can change in just a few months!

Since this threat got revived, I've got to completely reverse what I said previously.I'll take Venoms over Raiders every time unless I'm taking assault units that require more than 5 models to be transported.

On the other hand, Venom spam isn't the way to go.

-1 to hit can't be ignored, nor can the movement range. If you're running Warriors, give 5 of them a Blaster and stick them in a Venom, you can't do better than that for troops choices.You can also, on all short edge deployments, completely lock down your side of the board with 3-4 Venoms in terms of deep strike denial.They're also tiny and easy to hide.

3x5 Kabs in Venoms is the troops for any Battalion I take if it's pure Drukhari.

_________________Yo ho, yo ho, a drug-fueled BDSM space-elf pirate's life for me!Can I get a Roll Tide?

amishprn86Archon

Posts : 3974Join date : 2014-10-04Location : Ohio

Subject: Re: raider vs venom Fri Mar 02 2018, 22:33

I stopped playing both. I just use 2 Vbombersm 4-5 Ravagers and lots of Beasts/walking kabals.

205pts for 10 Kabals + DL in a Raider+DL, for that points i can just have 30 bodies with 0 DL's or do 25 bodies and 2 DL's floating around. Over all its more wounds and high damage weapons like Plasma/Lascannons etc.. dont effect me as much.

I just feel 115pts for a vehicle for our troops isnt worth it at all. where 35pts more i can have a better vehicle with much more damage.

I think the most important factor to consider about giving your basic Warriors a Blaster, is that your opponent has to chew through 6 T5, -1 to hit, 4+/5++ wounds and 5 T3, 5+, 6+ FNP wounds to get to the blaster.

For a weapon with the kind of utility that a Blaster has, its very often worth its weight in gold.

The problem I have with the venom is that it can only carry 5 models. Meaning i can't run a squad of incubi in a raider with a character. Same with raiders to a lesser extent. If I want to run wyches and a succubus I can only run 9. Here's hoping we get transport capacity of both increased to 6 and 11 respectively in the new codex